Kenyan or Janeese?

[Anonymous]

It does seem like the anti-Janeese propaganda is a coordinated effort. Or at least someone who is getting paid to keep on it. But I keep seeing more Janeese signs going up in yards around my neighborhood and my commute.

Is the propaganda from McDuffie staffers? Maybe the right-wing MPD guy that went after Janeese when she ran for council? Not a good look no matter how it is.

[Anonymous]

I am the PP who mentioned McDuffie’s kids attending GDS. it matters to me and I’m sure many others that he has no faith in DCPS public or charter schools, and that is why both of his kids attend neither. I will give it to Bowser, she enrolled her daughter in her neighborhood school. That says a lot! She is ALL in. That’s what I want from my next mayor. Walk the walk!

[Anonymous]

Neither did Obama or Clinton or Biden.

[Anonymous]

Janeese says "we can utilize pension funds to finance new housing."

Can we discuss if this is wise or not? I'm not sure this is a good idea, but I suppose I could be convinced.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am the PP who mentioned McDuffie’s kids attending GDS. it matters to me and I’m sure many others that he has no faith in DCPS public or charter schools, and that is why both of his kids attend neither. I will give it to Bowser, she enrolled her daughter in her neighborhood school. That says a lot! She is ALL in. That’s what I want from my next mayor. Walk the walk!

DP but is McDuffie the only candidate with school-aged children? I know Janeese's kid is a baby and I don't know much about the other candidates. As a black family in EOTP NWDC, in our community it's not in any way seen a sign that a family doesn't care about public schools when they send their kids to private. I don't have any strong positive association with McDuffie (seems inclined to be exactly as corrupt as he can get away with, if I'm being honest), but I feel like it would be weird to make "kids must be in public schools" a litmus test if the test can only be applied to one candidate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It does seem like the anti-Janeese propaganda is a coordinated effort. Or at least someone who is getting paid to keep on it. But I keep seeing more Janeese signs going up in yards around my neighborhood and my commute.

Is the propaganda from McDuffie staffers? Maybe the right-wing MPD guy that went after Janeese when she ran for council? Not a good look no matter how it is.

Really unfortunate for JLG's side that so many here frame reasonable disagreement as astroturfing. Not much daylight between that and Republicans casting protestors as Soros-paid actors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Re schools---if you care about public schools in DC, then I would suggest focusing on the fact that JLG is anti-charter. Charters have enabled families to remain in the DCPS system for the last 20 years when previously middle class families either avoided DC public schools entirely or else bailed for suburbs or privates after elementary schools. JLG is beholden to teachers' unions---you know, the folks who made DC kids miss years of in person school during Covid for far longer than necessary and have been opposed to charters. I care much more about JLG's anti-charter attitude than I do about where Kenyan sends his kids to school.


More scurrilous, baseless garbage. Here is JLG's WTU questionnaire:

https://assets.nationbuilder.com/wtulocal6act...rge-2.pdf?1767889885

This is what she tells the WTU, which - as you yourself note - doesn't like charters. And there is nothing in her responses to suggest she is "anti-charter". In fact, she responds to a leading question that suggests a "moratorium on charter openings" by suggesting nothing of the sort. Rather, what she is proposing for charters - greater transparency etc. - seems completely reasonable.

Please stop with the propaganda. Your attempts to spread such nonsense do nothing but make you look extremely foolish.

Hmm. Obviously I hit a nerve. The entire response to the questionnaire demonstrates how in the pocket of WTU she actually is. JLG has never even visited one of the highest performing charters in her ward, despite invitations. The PCSB already has significant transparency requirements. The Council passed that legislation several years ago so unsure what exactly she means by "greater transparency" since that legislation was specifically designed to force charters to be even more transparent than regular DCPS. She has never been a friend to the charter sector. But if you would like to correct me by explaining how JLG has in actuality been supportive of the charter sector (and give actual examples), I'd like to hear that.

I have no particular interest in this issue, but nonetheless find your propaganda offensive to everyone's intelligence.

And, if you actually bothered to read the WTU questionnaire, you would see "exactly [what] she means". For example, "We should explore other funding models that incorporate average daily membership across the full school year (for both sectors) to ensure fairness and predictability." How is that a bad idea vs. basing school funding based on a single count day at the beginning of the year?

DC doesn't need a mayor that is "a friend to the charter sector". DC needs a mayor that is supportive of an improving the quality of public education, regardless of whether that education is provided by DCPS or charters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am the PP who mentioned McDuffie’s kids attending GDS. it matters to me and I’m sure many others that he has no faith in DCPS public or charter schools, and that is why both of his kids attend neither. I will give it to Bowser, she enrolled her daughter in her neighborhood school. That says a lot! She is ALL in. That’s what I want from my next mayor. Walk the walk!

DP but is McDuffie the only candidate with school-aged children? I know Janeese's kid is a baby and I don't know much about the other candidates. As a black family in EOTP NWDC, in our community it's not in any way seen a sign that a family doesn't care about public schools when they send their kids to private. I don't have any strong positive association with McDuffie (seems inclined to be exactly as corrupt as he can get away with, if I'm being honest), but I feel like it would be weird to make "kids must be in public schools" a litmus test if the test can only be applied to one candidate.

What troubles me more than having his kids at GDS is the position he held on the Board of GDS.

Would he have been given a Board seat were he not a member of the DC Council? If not, what help did GDS expect in return for offering him the Board seat?

Is it really appropriate for an elected councilmember to spend their time strengthening an elite private school rather than spending than time strengthening the DC public education system?

I’m surprised that he was even allowed to hold the position under DC Council rules, but be that as it may it’s not a great look at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am the PP who mentioned McDuffie’s kids attending GDS. it matters to me and I’m sure many others that he has no faith in DCPS public or charter schools, and that is why both of his kids attend neither. I will give it to Bowser, she enrolled her daughter in her neighborhood school. That says a lot! She is ALL in. That’s what I want from my next mayor. Walk the walk!

The fact that he recognizes how terrible DCPS is is exactly why he is the better of the two candidates.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Janeese says "we can utilize pension funds to finance new housing."

Can we discuss if this is wise or not? I'm not sure this is a good idea, but I suppose I could be convinced.

Or more correctly, how could you do this? Government pension funds are usually "backed" by real property, but are paid from current budgets. There's no big pile of cash waiting to be paid to people.

[Anonymous]

I have no particular interest in this issue, but nonetheless find your propaganda offensive to everyone's intelligence.

And, if you actually bothered to read the WTU questionnaire, you would see "exactly [what] she means". For example, "We should explore other funding models that incorporate average daily membership across the full school year (for both sectors) to ensure fairness and predictability." How is that a bad idea vs. basing school funding based on a single count day at the beginning of the year?

DC doesn't need a mayor that is "a friend to the charter sector". DC needs a mayor that is supportive of an improving the quality of public education, regardless of whether that education is provided by DCPS or charters.

I did read the questionnaire answers and you are trying to sidestep my questions and deal in generalities. I would like to hear specifically how JLG has been supportive of the charter sector. Yes, all of public education in DC is important. But the reality is that 45% of the students accessing public education in the District of Columbia attend charter schools. Mayoral support of the charter school sector is of importance to those families. If JLG cannot openly express support for the charter sector, then that is of concern because it suggests that she would be much more beholden to her WTU endorsers and their anti-charter positions.

And to the PP who said that the anti-JLG positions were all coordinated, I would agree with the responding poster who noted the tendency of the JLG camp to vilify anyone who disagrees with their policy positions---which is what you are trying to do with me with your "offensive to everyone's intelligence" type rhetoric. Unfortunately, the progressive left in DC is similar to the far right in that type of behavior---anyone who doesn't automatically fall in line with their positions needs to be demonized.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am the PP who mentioned McDuffie’s kids attending GDS. it matters to me and I’m sure many others that he has no faith in DCPS public or charter schools, and that is why both of his kids attend neither. I will give it to Bowser, she enrolled her daughter in her neighborhood school. That says a lot! She is ALL in. That’s what I want from my next mayor. Walk the walk!

The fact that he recognizes how terrible DCPS is is exactly why he is the better of the two candidates.

I have no problem that he recognizes how terrible the DCPS experience can be. I do have a problem that he uses his status as an elected representative to strengthen an elite private school - which is completely out of reach for 99.9% of DC families - rather than to address the factors that make DCPS so terrible for many students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Neither did Obama or Clinton or Biden.

That was a security issue… the mayor is not the same as the President…what a reach!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I have no particular interest in this issue, but nonetheless find your propaganda offensive to everyone's intelligence.

And, if you actually bothered to read the WTU questionnaire, you would see "exactly [what] she means". For example, "We should explore other funding models that incorporate average daily membership across the full school year (for both sectors) to ensure fairness and predictability." How is that a bad idea vs. basing school funding based on a single count day at the beginning of the year?

DC doesn't need a mayor that is "a friend to the charter sector". DC needs a mayor that is supportive of an improving the quality of public education, regardless of whether that education is provided by DCPS or charters.

I did read the questionnaire answers and you are trying to sidestep my questions and deal in generalities. I would like to hear specifically how JLG has been supportive of the charter sector. Yes, all of public education in DC is important. But the reality is that 45% of the students accessing public education in the District of Columbia attend charter schools. Mayoral support of the charter school sector is of importance to those families. If JLG cannot openly express support for the charter sector, then that is of concern because it suggests that she would be much more beholden to her WTU endorsers and their anti-charter positions.

And to the PP who said that the anti-JLG positions were all coordinated, I would agree with the responding poster who noted the tendency of the JLG camp to vilify anyone who disagrees with their policy positions---which is what you are trying to do with me with your "offensive to everyone's intelligence" type rhetoric. Unfortunately, the progressive left in DC is similar to the far right in that type of behavior---anyone who doesn't automatically fall in line with their positions needs to be demonized.

Stop the freaking gaslighting, which, yes, is offensive to everyone who reads your comments.

You claimed JLG is “anti-charter” and the only evidence you have to back up that claim is that she didn’t one particular charter school? I’ve had kids in DCPS across two wards for the past decade and not once has any of the four CMs that covered those two wards over the period visited any of them, but yet I’m not going around shouting about how they are anti-public education.

Not content with making ridiculous unfounded claims, you are now demanding others prove that JLG is explicitly pro-charter? Putting aside the fact that it is questionable whether any DC voter should want such a person as their mayor, her responses to the questionnaire makes blatantly clear that she is not “beholden to her WTU endorsers”. That you doggedly insist otherwise suggest that you are not at all interested in doing anything other than vilifying a particular candidate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Neither did Obama or Clinton or Biden.

That was a security issue… the mayor is not the same as the President…what a reach!

Complete tangent (and DP), but this is what I said when Bowser had the city pay to build a security booth/new retaining wall on her property. Like, what? Just say you didn't want to take out a HELOC to fix your yard and replace your windows, because there's no world where the Mayor of DC needs 24 hour security at the end of her driveway!